Lawyerly

GR No. 160110

2014-06-18

MARIANO C. MENDOZA v. SPS. LEONORA J. GOMEZ

PEREZ, J.

Moral Damages. Moral damages are awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means, diversions or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he has undergone, by reason of the defendant's culpable action.[35]

GR No. 174089

2012-01-25

ORIX METRO LEASING v. MANGALINAO Y DIZON

DEL CASTILLO, J.

Negligence and proximate cause are factual issues.[36] Settled is the rule that this Court is not a trier of facts, and the concurrence of the findings of fact of the courts below are conclusive. "A petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court should include only questions of law - questions of fact are not reviewable"[37] save for several exceptions,[38] two of which petitioners invoke, i.e., that 'the finding is grounded on speculations, surmises, and conjectures,' and that 'the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts.'

GR Nos. 140743 & 140745

2009-09-17

CITY GOVERNMENT OF TAGAYTAY v. ELEUTERIO F. GUERRERO

NACHURA, J.

The gross negligence of the City of Tagaytay in levying taxes and auctioning properties to answer for real property tax deficiencies outside its territorial jurisdiction amounts to bad faith that calls for the award of moral damages. Moral damages are meant to compensate the claimant for any physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar injuries unjustly caused. Although incapable of pecuniary estimation, the amount must somehow be proportional to and in approximation of the suffering inflicted.[59]

GR No. 165622

2008-10-17

MERCURY DRUG CORPORATION v. RAUL DE LEON

REYES, R.T., J.

Moral damages are not intended to impose a penalty to the wrongdoer or to enrich the claimant at the expense of defendant.[97] There is no hard and fast rule in determining what would be a fair and reasonable amount of moral damages since each case must be governed by its peculiar circumstances.[98] However, the award of damages must be commensurate to the loss or injury suffered.[99]

GR NO. 157168

2007-06-26

U-BIX CORPORATION. v. RICHEL BANDIOLA

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages. Exemplary damages are designed to permit the courts to mould behavior that has socially deleterious consequences, and their imposition is required by public policy to suppress the wanton acts of the offender.[35]

GR NO. 164220

2007-04-27

GERARDO AOANAN v. JOSE AOANAN

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

However, with respect to the issue of the propriety of the award of moral damages to respondent, we find for petitioner. In order that moral damages may be awarded, there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright and the like.[9] While respondent alleged in his Answer with Counterclaim that he has suffered and continues to suffer sleepless nights, serious anxiety and mental anguish, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock and social humiliation, he failed to prove them during the trial. There must be clear testimony on the anguish and other forms of mental suffering.[10] A thorough review of respondent's testimony, however, would show that he failed to substantiate his claim of mental anguish, serious anxiety, wounded feelings and other emotional and mental sufferings he purportedly suffered that would have justified an award for moral damages. Mere allegations do not suffice; they must be substantiated by clear and convincing proof.[11]

GR NO. 147477

2006-06-27

HERMENEGILDO M. TRINIDAD v. ESTRELLA ACAPULCO

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

In order that moral damages may be awarded, there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright and the like, and while no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded, it is nevertheless essential that the claimant should satisfactorily show the existence of the factual basis of damages and its causal connection to defendant's acts.[34] Claims must be substantiated by clear and convincing proof[35] and there must be clear testimony on the anguish and other forms of mental sufferings as mere allegations will not suffice.[36] Allegations of besmirched reputation, embarrassment and sleepless nights are insufficient for it must be shown that the proximate cause thereof was the unlawful act or omission of the opposing party.[37]

GR No. 148737

2004-06-16

ERNESTO PLEYTO v. MARIA D. LOMBOY

QUISUMBING, J.

Under Article 2206 of the Civil Code, the spouse, legitimate children and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased.[30] However, we must stress that moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and are not meant to enrich complainant at the expense of defendant.[31] Moral damages are awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means, diversions or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he/she has undergone, by reason of the defendant's culpable action. Its award is aimed at restoration, as much as possible, of the spiritual status quo ante; thus it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted.[32] Under the circumstances of this case, an award of P100,000 to the heirs of Ricardo Lomboy would be justified and in keeping with the purpose of the law and jurisprudence in allowing moral damages.[33]

GR No. 127473

2003-12-08

PHILIPPINE AIRLINES v. CA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

The CA erred in upholding the trial court's award of moral damages based on Judy Amor's claim that there was a denigration of her social and financial standing. Private respondent Judy failed to show that she was treated rudely or disrespectfully by petitioner's employees despite her stature as a dentist. As we held in Kierulf vs. Court of Appeals[48]

GR No. 150487

2003-07-10

GERARDO F. SAMSON JR. v. BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS

PANGANIBAN, J.

spiritual status quo ante; thus, it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. Since each case must be governed by its own peculiar circumstances, there is no hard and fast rule in determining the proper amount. x x x."[16] The social standing of the aggrieved party is essential to the determination of the proper amount of the award. Otherwise, the goal of enabling him to obtain means, diversions, or amusements to restore him to the status quo ante would not be achieved.

	GR No. 160110 2014-06-18	MARIANO C. MENDOZA v. SPS. LEONORA J. GOMEZ PEREZ, J.
Moral Damages. Moral damages are awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means, diversions or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he has undergone, by reason of the defendant's culpable action.[35]
	GR No. 174089 2012-01-25	ORIX METRO LEASING v. MANGALINAO Y DIZON DEL CASTILLO, J.
Negligence and proximate cause are factual issues.[36] Settled is the rule that this Court is not a trier of facts, and the concurrence of the findings of fact of the courts below are conclusive. "A petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court should include only questions of law - questions of fact are not reviewable"[37] save for several exceptions,[38] two of which petitioners invoke, i.e., that 'the finding is grounded on speculations, surmises, and conjectures,' and that 'the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts.'
	GR Nos. 140743 & 140745 2009-09-17	CITY GOVERNMENT OF TAGAYTAY v. ELEUTERIO F. GUERRERO NACHURA, J.
The gross negligence of the City of Tagaytay in levying taxes and auctioning properties to answer for real property tax deficiencies outside its territorial jurisdiction amounts to bad faith that calls for the award of moral damages. Moral damages are meant to compensate the claimant for any physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar injuries unjustly caused. Although incapable of pecuniary estimation, the amount must somehow be proportional to and in approximation of the suffering inflicted.[59]
	GR No. 165622 2008-10-17	MERCURY DRUG CORPORATION v. RAUL DE LEON REYES, R.T., J.
Moral damages are not intended to impose a penalty to the wrongdoer or to enrich the claimant at the expense of defendant.[97] There is no hard and fast rule in determining what would be a fair and reasonable amount of moral damages since each case must be governed by its peculiar circumstances.[98] However, the award of damages must be commensurate to the loss or injury suffered.[99]
	GR NO. 157168 2007-06-26	U-BIX CORPORATION. v. RICHEL BANDIOLA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages. Exemplary damages are designed to permit the courts to mould behavior that has socially deleterious consequences, and their imposition is required by public policy to suppress the wanton acts of the offender.[35]
	GR NO. 164220 2007-04-27	GERARDO AOANAN v. JOSE AOANAN CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
However, with respect to the issue of the propriety of the award of moral damages to respondent, we find for petitioner. In order that moral damages may be awarded, there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright and the like.[9] While respondent alleged in his Answer with Counterclaim that he has suffered and continues to suffer sleepless nights, serious anxiety and mental anguish, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock and social humiliation, he failed to prove them during the trial. There must be clear testimony on the anguish and other forms of mental suffering.[10] A thorough review of respondent's testimony, however, would show that he failed to substantiate his claim of mental anguish, serious anxiety, wounded feelings and other emotional and mental sufferings he purportedly suffered that would have justified an award for moral damages. Mere allegations do not suffice; they must be substantiated by clear and convincing proof.[11]
	GR NO. 147477 2006-06-27	HERMENEGILDO M. TRINIDAD v. ESTRELLA ACAPULCO AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
In order that moral damages may be awarded, there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright and the like, and while no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded, it is nevertheless essential that the claimant should satisfactorily show the existence of the factual basis of damages and its causal connection to defendant's acts.[34] Claims must be substantiated by clear and convincing proof[35] and there must be clear testimony on the anguish and other forms of mental sufferings as mere allegations will not suffice.[36] Allegations of besmirched reputation, embarrassment and sleepless nights are insufficient for it must be shown that the proximate cause thereof was the unlawful act or omission of the opposing party.[37]
	GR No. 148737 2004-06-16	ERNESTO PLEYTO v. MARIA D. LOMBOY QUISUMBING, J.
Under Article 2206 of the Civil Code, the spouse, legitimate children and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased.[30] However, we must stress that moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and are not meant to enrich complainant at the expense of defendant.[31] Moral damages are awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means, diversions or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he/she has undergone, by reason of the defendant's culpable action. Its award is aimed at restoration, as much as possible, of the spiritual status quo ante; thus it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted.[32] Under the circumstances of this case, an award of P100,000 to the heirs of Ricardo Lomboy would be justified and in keeping with the purpose of the law and jurisprudence in allowing moral damages.[33]
	GR No. 127473 2003-12-08	PHILIPPINE AIRLINES v. CA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The CA erred in upholding the trial court's award of moral damages based on Judy Amor's claim that there was a denigration of her social and financial standing. Private respondent Judy failed to show that she was treated rudely or disrespectfully by petitioner's employees despite her stature as a dentist. As we held in Kierulf vs. Court of Appeals[48]
	GR No. 150487 2003-07-10	GERARDO F. SAMSON JR. v. BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS PANGANIBAN, J.
spiritual status quo ante; thus, it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. Since each case must be governed by its own peculiar circumstances, there is no hard and fast rule in determining the proper amount. x x x."[16] The social standing of the aggrieved party is essential to the determination of the proper amount of the award. Otherwise, the goal of enabling him to obtain means, diversions, or amusements to restore him to the status quo ante would not be achieved.

VICTOR KIERULF v. CA